Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

M82...

AndyUK

By AndyUK
in Imaging - Deep Sky

Recommended Posts

AndyUK

AndyUK

Posted
Posted

It's typical isn't it - You wait for ages to be at home when a clear sky comes along and when it does, and you get 3 on the trot, the moon's glaring down and all the main nebulae at this time of the year are hidden behind the house... So rather than waste 6 + hours for the moon to set, I had to find a target with Ha in it, which I could then carry on with afterwards... A shortlist of one came out - M82.

I was rather hoping I might get more of the Ha filament with nearly 1000mins exposure... but obviously my processing skills weren't up to it :D

MN190 - Ha 49x1200s, RGB 30x240s each channel unbinned (50 bias, 30 flats per filter). The Ha was added 50% to a false luminance layer using a separate stack of all the RGB subs. The Ha was also added 70/30 to the red channel to create a L(Ha)R(Ha)GB image.

Registered / aligned with Registar, stacked in DSS, combined in CS5.

post-18819-133877728785_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AndyUK

AndyUK

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Cheers all - Yes Freddie - It's the Baader 7mm...

I've actually since put together a co-operative version using the 24 hours of my data with another 11+ hours that Sara (Swag72) took in Spain the week before.

It shows up my processing workflow a bit as, try as I might, I couldn't get quite the same colour balance, but here it is with the extra data (my thanks, obviously, to Sara with her ED120, 0.8x reducer, Atik 314L+, and Ha 20x1200, RGB 15x300s each channel unbinned). I think there might be more detail in this version(?)

post-18819-1338777289_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
swag72

swag72

Posted
Posted

That does look good (If I do say so myself!!) I think that maybe with Galaxy season coming I need to ditch the reducer and just go native. I know that I said to you that the stars seemed awfully big (!!) but it seems to work fine. Now where's that 50mm extension tube?!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AndyUK

AndyUK

Posted
  • Author
Posted

(Cheers Bob!)

Good idea Sara - It will also make our FOV's slightly more similar...! And with regards to those stars, some of that will be down to my processing (I'm sure) as I don't know how to use star maps (:icon_salut:). I can always run one of Noel's actions on it a few times to try and reduce them down a bit, but I know that's not really "the proper way"...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AndyUK

AndyUK

Posted
  • Author
Posted

On behalf of myself and Sara - Cheers all...!

Although the Ha filaments are obviously visible, I still can't get over how little actually comes through for 49x20mins at f5.3 plus Sara's 20x20mins at f5.6 (total 23 hours) but Sara's additional data certainly helped to bring out additional detail in the core - I could probably pop it out a little more with a layer masked Hi-pass filter, but I don't want to overwork it! I'm not sure I have the courage to go for 30min subs, but I do wonder what one of those supernewts might make of 20 min Ha subs on this... :icon_salut:

Olly - I've been trying to figure out in which direction that other one will lie in relation to this, but I think I'd need at least 2 panes to get it in, although as I don't think there's much Ha in the other one I guess it wouldn't take anywhere near as long to capture straight RGB's (Sara - Are you up for having a crack at the other one @ 20x5mins each filter when the moon's gone...? :))

EDIT - Rattler - We WILL get that cam running...!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
swag72

swag72

Posted
Posted

As long as I don't need to get the bit in the middle, then I'm sure I could manage something Andy. Trying to get some extra thumbscrews for the extension tube so that I can get a couple of more holes made and should be able to use the ED120 at 900mm - Much nearer yours, but slower!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AndyUK

AndyUK

Posted
  • Author
Posted

It being a bit early for me, for a minute I thought you meant you wanted to exclude the middle of the galaxy (that would be some interesting optics :icon_salut:), and then it clicked that you meant the pane with absolutely nothing but a handful of stars... [DOH!]

No - I think we'll give that bit a miss - I've already spent half a night taking an image of virtually empty sky before (albeit accidently), but I think we'll give that a miss for now... Depending on how the relative framing of the two objects might fit together, I might have a go at it one night if I'm really bored (I wonder if 60x1 minute exposures of 2x2 binned RGB would do it?) but only if the panes will crop nicely together.

We'll talk about it elsewhere...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AndyUK

AndyUK

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Cheers Olly - It took me a little while to work out, but from your image the frames I'd need to get from M82 to M81 are towards the south west of mine/Sara's...

To be honest, your image helps bring home exactly how small the FOV is with our scopes and the 314L+ - There'd probably be maybe 3 panes required of starfield before getting to M81.... and that would seriously fill the frame! If I do go for the "bit in between", I think I'll try it with the Equinox 80...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AndyUK

AndyUK

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks Isabelle / Kevin... Your comments are very much appreciated :)! I don't know when it will be, but I'm quite looking forward to filling the frame with M81 - My previous attempt with the DSLR was okay, but again was taken during a full moon and I know I can do better :icon_eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.